Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Python: Drop support for Python 3.6

[Thomas Huth]

On 17/02/2023 10.06, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> writes:
...
> My view on all this is a bit more pragmatic.
>
> For a human developer, the difference between "dnf install
> python-sphinx" and "pip install sphinx" is, in my opinion, close to
> negligible.  Really no comparison to "git-clone GCC and bootstap it".
> You seem to disagree with that.

Honestly, being a Python ignorant, I completely messed up my system with 
"pip" already a couple of times, especially if the instructions forgot to 
tell me to use the "--user" switch. So yes, I tend to disagree ;-)

> For automated builds in general, and distro packaging in particular, the
> difference is real, and could even be a show stopper.  But who's
> packaging bleeding edge QEMU on CentOS 8?  I suspect the only automated
> builds are our own CI, where the difference is real, but hardly a show
> stopper.

If we've got the feeling that nobody out there really builds QEMU on older 
long-term distros anymore, then why the heck are we still trying to support 
this according to our support statement?

> But then I'd like us to be a bit more pragmatic.  Is minor and graceful
> degradation for systems close to the trailing edge really so
> unacceptably terrible that we have to bend over backwards to avoid it?

Let's just get our support statement adjusted - it was written with good 
intention originally, but apparently this is causing too much pain, so we 
should adjust it instead of suffering in upstream development.

> > > All the angst about CentOS falling off the end of our "supported build
> > > platforms" list is not actually warranted by this series :)
> >
> > Using the term "angst" for the concerns of your fellows here is quite
> > cheeky. It's not about "angst", it's about a discussion that our support
> > policy might need to be adjusted if we do this step. So instead of writing
> > such sentences, I'd rather would like to see you posting a patch for
> > docs/about/build-platforms.rst for constructive further discussion instead.
>
> The phrasing of this sentence was ill-advised.  If it caused offense, I
> apologize.

Ok, thanks. And just to make it clear again: I certainly do not object 
dropping the support for Python 3.6 - I just want to make sure that we 
adjust our support statement if the current version is causing too much pain 
for us. Sorry if I got that across in the wrong way.

 Thomas